Literature DB >> 12942980

Auditory spatial resolution in horizontal, vertical, and diagonal planes.

D Wesley Grantham1, Benjamin W Y Hornsby, Eric A Erpenbeck.   

Abstract

Minimum audible angle (MAA) and minimum audible movement angle (MAMA) thresholds were measured for stimuli in horizontal, vertical, and diagonal (60 degrees) planes. A pseudovirtual technique was employed in which signals were recorded through KEMAR's ears and played back to subjects through insert earphones. Thresholds were obtained for wideband, high-pass, and low-pass noises. Only 6 of 20 subjects obtained wideband vertical-plane MAAs less than 10 degrees, and only these 6 subjects were retained for the complete study. For all three filter conditions thresholds were lowest in the horizontal plane, slightly (but significantly) higher in the diagonal plane, and highest for the vertical plane. These results were similar in magnitude and pattern to those reported by Perrott and Saberi [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 1728-1731 (1990)] and Saberi and Perrott [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 2639-2644 (1990)], except that these investigators generally found that thresholds for diagonal planes were as good as those for the horizontal plane. The present results are consistent with the hypothesis that diagonal-plane performance is based on independent contributions from a horizontal-plane system (sensitive to interaural differences) and a vertical-plane system (sensitive to pinna-based spectral changes). Measurements of the stimuli recorded through KEMAR indicated that sources presented from diagonal planes can produce larger interaural level differences (ILDs) in certain frequency regions than would be expected based on the horizontal projection of the trajectory. Such frequency-specific ILD cues may underlie the very good performance reported in previous studies for diagonal spatial resolution. Subjects in the present study could apparently not take advantage of these cues in the diagonal-plane condition, possibly because they did not externalize the images to their appropriate positions in space or possibly because of the absence of a patterned visual field.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12942980     DOI: 10.1121/1.1590970

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  13 in total

1.  Perceptual sensitivity to high-frequency interaural time differences created by rustling sounds.

Authors:  Stephan D Ewert; Katharina Kaiser; Lavinia Kernschmidt; Lutz Wiegrebe
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-11-29

2.  Can measures of sound localization acuity be related to the precision of absolute location estimates?

Authors:  Jordan M Moore; Daniel J Tollin; Tom C T Yin
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-11-28       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Human sensitivity to differences in the rate of auditory cue change.

Authors:  Erin S Maloff; D Wesley Grantham; Daniel H Ashmead
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Six Degrees of Auditory Spatial Separation.

Authors:  Simon Carlile; Alex Fox; Emily Orchard-Mills; Johahn Leung; David Alais
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2016-03-31

5.  A Method to Study Adaptation to Left-Right Reversed Audition.

Authors:  Atsushi Aoyama
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 1.355

6.  The effect of head roll on perceived auditory zenith.

Authors:  Denise C P B M Van Barneveld; Tom J Van Grootel; Bart Alberts; A John Van Opstal
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-06-04       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  The role of spectral composition of sounds on the localization of sound sources by cats.

Authors:  Daniel J Tollin; Janet L Ruhland; Tom C T Yin
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Spatial and temporal disparity in signals and maskers affects signal detection in non-human primates.

Authors:  Francesca Rocchi; Margit E Dylla; Peter A Bohlen; Ramnarayan Ramachandran
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Listen, You are Writing! Speeding up Online Spelling with a Dynamic Auditory BCI.

Authors:  Martijn Schreuder; Thomas Rost; Michael Tangermann
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 4.677

10.  Investigation of an MAA Test With Virtual Sound Synthesis.

Authors:  Ruijie Meng; Jingpeng Xiang; Jinqiu Sang; Chengshi Zheng; Xiaodong Li; Stefan Bleeck; Juanjuan Cai; Jie Wang
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-06-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.